Advocating the use of alcohol
Gary Lowell
Issue date: 11/5/09 Section: Opinion
Even assuming that a student advocating the use of alcohol is consuming alcohol, the policy does not seem to be related to lessening drinking. The act of putting up flyers advocating the use of alcohol is wholly separate from drinking alcohol. If someone is prevented from putting up flyers advocating the use of alcohol, that does nothing to prevent that person from consuming alcohol. I would also argue that it does nothing to discourage that person from consuming alcohol; there is no disincentive for that individual consuming alcohol just because he or she cannot post flyers advocating its use. Even if there are any effects on the people who post the flyers, they would seem to me to be extremely indirect effects. I therefore do not think that the policy would be able to lessen the amount of drinking through not allowing people to post the flyers.
The use of alcohol is widespread in society. One only has to watch the many Budweiser, Coors, Corona, etc. advertisements that there are or the prevalence and popularity of bars and alcohol at restaurants. If there are students at BSC who would want to drink alcohol simply by seeing material promoting its consumption, I find it hard to believe that postings promoting the use of alcohol at BSC would be what changes their mind. Students would only have to watch a football game, or other similar programs, to see a commercial promoting the use of alcohol. Even if there are any effects on the people who see the flyers that would not come from other places, they would seem to me to be extremely indirect effects. Consequently, I find it very hard to believe that the policy would be able to lessen the amount of drinking through not having people see posting that advocate the use of alcohol.
As a result of this, I do not see any way around the conclusion that the ban on postings that promote the use of alcohol is not directly, or even indirectly, related to reducing the amount of drinking on campus. I am very skeptical of any policy which puts a restraint on an individual's freedom of speech. As a result, I would require that any policy restricting speech be directly related to the interest it is supposed to further.
The use of alcohol is widespread in society. One only has to watch the many Budweiser, Coors, Corona, etc. advertisements that there are or the prevalence and popularity of bars and alcohol at restaurants. If there are students at BSC who would want to drink alcohol simply by seeing material promoting its consumption, I find it hard to believe that postings promoting the use of alcohol at BSC would be what changes their mind. Students would only have to watch a football game, or other similar programs, to see a commercial promoting the use of alcohol. Even if there are any effects on the people who see the flyers that would not come from other places, they would seem to me to be extremely indirect effects. Consequently, I find it very hard to believe that the policy would be able to lessen the amount of drinking through not having people see posting that advocate the use of alcohol.
As a result of this, I do not see any way around the conclusion that the ban on postings that promote the use of alcohol is not directly, or even indirectly, related to reducing the amount of drinking on campus. I am very skeptical of any policy which puts a restraint on an individual's freedom of speech. As a result, I would require that any policy restricting speech be directly related to the interest it is supposed to further.
Viewing Comments 1 - 6 of 7
Frank M
posted 11/05/09 @ 12:40 PM EST
In response to Mr. Lowell's dissertation on the policy of Bridgewater State College to prohibit the use of postings which promote the consumption of alcohol, I have the following opinions and questions. (Continued…)
Matthew Dovell
posted 11/05/09 @ 1:35 PM EST
"Stop and think about his intent before you try and roast him for being anti-American, anti-constitution."
There is nothing within the context of what Mr. (Continued…)
Nick
posted 11/05/09 @ 4:42 PM EST
I think Frank is off point a bit with the "have you ever lost someone to a drunk driver" speech. This isn't about drunk driving. Drive around BSC at 1AM (when the bars close) and you'll find a vast majority of students walking back from (after having walked to) the bar. (Continued…)
Frank M
posted 11/05/09 @ 5:08 PM EST
Ok Nick, I appreciate your scolding of me for daring to bring reality into the conversation. Why don't we try to get me back on track, because I am interested in what the problem is here that prompted Mr. (Continued…)
Gary Lowell
posted 11/06/09 @ 1:25 PM EST
I did not say that the school should remove its tough policies on alcohol, I only said that this policy does not seem to be directly related to reducing drinking on campus. (Continued…)
fmac316
Frank M
posted 11/06/09 @ 5:02 PM EST
Let me again try to clear up MY words so that we can all understand each other, since it appears I have this all wrong and that I am making up fictitious and irrelevant scenarios to explain my position on why it is that the president of the college should stick to his policy of not allowing postings on campus which "advocate" the use of alcohol. (Continued…)
Post a Comment